Kimi K3, and what we can still learn from the pelican benchmark
94 points
3 hours ago
| 17 comments
| simonwillison.net
| HN
bcit-cst
1 minute ago
[-]
The gap is closing . I think Kimi 3 is only 3 months behind the US model. It’s gpt 5.5 class model , which was released in the end of April.
reply
OsrsNeedsf2P
1 hour ago
[-]
It's incredible Simon still believes pelicans on bikes aren't part of the training set, despite hundreds of them on blogs, forums, and Github. Stuff we put in our company blog shows up known by LLMs 6 months later, and we have 1000x less traffic than Simon's own website
reply
cebert
53 minutes ago
[-]
Simon has stated a few times that he knows it’s possible that pelicans could be in the training sets. He also has other tests he doesn’t share publicly. He’s just a fan of pelicans.
reply
eminence32
1 hour ago
[-]
Pelicans and bikes can be in the training set without them training for this specific benchmark.
reply
j_maffe
47 minutes ago
[-]
Yes and that would improve its ability to draw SVGs of pelicans on bikes, no?
reply
asasidh
18 minutes ago
[-]
and that is bad because ?
reply
program_whiz
9 minutes ago
[-]
the nature of the test was to see if the models can effectively compose an image of a novel concept outside the training set. If they are trained on it, it ceases to be an interesting test to some extent.
reply
cyanydeez
5 minutes ago
[-]
it's still interesting because there's no pelican-on-bike model, and if you're training a model well enough, then it should be obvious when a model has reached "AGI" or whatever.
reply
podgietaru
55 minutes ago
[-]
More to it, the actual bloody companies are using them as a reference. Maybe it’s a 3d version, not an svg - but it clearly shows they’re on the radar of these companies.
reply
andy_xor_andrew
40 minutes ago
[-]
Did you read the post? It's not even that long. He explicitly mentions this...
reply
Barbing
21 minutes ago
[-]
Are they responding to: “I’m still not convinced that labs are training for the benchmark—if they were, I’d expect much better results.”
reply
drcongo
9 minutes ago
[-]
Clearly not. There's a subset of HN users who rush to post this same thing every single time.
reply
oceanplexian
44 minutes ago
[-]
Imagine if we applied this train of logic to humans.

"That artist saw a pelican at the beach once!" [cue the outrage] "He's not a real artist, he's a cheater and produces nothing original!"

reply
program_whiz
7 minutes ago
[-]
This is a sight-reading test. If a musician practices a piece for thousands of hours, it would no longer be an effective sight reading / creativity test. The purpose of the test was to see how models would compose something novel requiring the ability to compose orthogonal, normally unrelated, components into a coherent image.
reply
computably
41 minutes ago
[-]
Except, of course, LLMs are not humans, and they do not learn or "reason" in a way which even remotely resembles humans.

Plus obviously humans can still overfit to a specific style of test.

reply
semilin
1 hour ago
[-]
They can be in the training set but not deliberately trained for. There may be a lot of people posting pelican svgs, but not typically because they're high quality and worth replicating.
reply
devttyeu
1 hour ago
[-]
> How does the prompt “Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle” add up to 95 input tokens? OpenAI’s tokenizer counts 10, Anthropic’s counts 10 for Opus 4.6, 30 for Opus 4.7 and 25 for Sonnet 5/Fable 5. Prompting “hi” to Kimi K3 counted 86 tokens, suggesting there may be an 85 token hidden system prompt. It refused to leak it though.

This is quite possibly reasoning-effort prompt which is injected before the opening <think> token whenever you set a custom reasoning effort, see e.g. DeepSeek-V4 max mode prompt: https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4-Pro/blob/main...

reply
nothercastle
2 minutes ago
[-]
It’s not bad kind of expensive for 25c but if the prompt is rendered cost is much better.
reply
tibbar
16 minutes ago
[-]
I wonder how the Chinese labs are training a 3 trillion parameter model on what has to be vastly smaller compute resources. If the U.S. compute advantage is persistent, it's hard to imagine that Chinese labs will be able to keep pace forever, as a matter of physics, but... so far they seem to be doing just fine.
reply
rdtsc
17 minutes ago
[-]
The idea is not to use pelicans on bikes but a similarly random non-sensical prompts: crows on scooters, squirrels in a moon rover etc. Then pick another one for another for next cross-llm evaluation.
reply
Lerc
50 minutes ago
[-]
Do any of the vision models render the SVG and look at the result.

Perhaps more importantly can they do that during reinforcement training. Learning how to critically analyse the appearance of what it generates would be quite useful.

Manually feeding images back to models has been hilariously bad in the past which suggests that relating something it sees to something it wrote is not an ability it is very good at.

reply
mesmertech
1 hour ago
[-]
My personal benchmark for new models has been to compare video making skills with something like remotion. Usually reveals if they have any "taste" or outside the box thinking.

I'm starting to not trust any "benchmarks" when it comes to frontier models at least. As an example Sol feels the most "gets stuff done" but has zero taste, or any capability to surprise.

And for frontier models I go one step ahead and try to recreate a complex animation video, with the ability for the model to review its own work. And at this Fable is still the top one. Ex: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDAeAuYyl0E (recreation of Claude announcement video) and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSsVNtGPOIg (recreation of a fireship video). Sol did something similar but you can instantly tell its AI slop from very small things, and it just has no narrative or thought put into the writing.

https://mesmer.tools/benchmarks/ai-video-generation , I usually put basic ones here.

reply
mesmertech
1 hour ago
[-]
And on creativity at least visually, Gemini 3.1 pro is somehow still up there. But its really hindered by its inability to use tool calls effectively or make a long term plan.
reply
hkalbasi
1 hour ago
[-]
Is there a gallery of all pelicans generated by simon over time?
reply
chrismorgan
32 minutes ago
[-]
https://simonwillison.net/tags/pelican-riding-a-bicycle/ isn’t quite a gallery, but pretty close.
reply
inglor_cz
55 minutes ago
[-]
If Simon reads this debate, I would gladly vote for such a gallery. It would belong to "digital heritage of mankind".
reply
Xx_crazy420_xX
1 hour ago
[-]
I would be surprised if pelican svgs are not part of the training corpus rn
reply
skeledrew
1 hour ago
[-]
If that were the case then it'd do a way better job. Think experienced artist level.
reply
whywhywhywhy
33 minutes ago
[-]
Don't see why we have to have this spammed every model release when Fable class models perform the same as Opus on basic tasks like these.
reply
dsign
1 hour ago
[-]
Another day, another model and another pelican :-)

I can't help but wonder where is the trend going? What will we have in five years? Maybe it will all have puttered out, and we will have moved to the next thing? Or maybe the prompt then will be "make a pelican ride a bicycle", and out will come the genetic code for a giant pelican with extremities suitable for a handle bar and pedals, and an inborn affinity to ride bicycles?

reply
rvz
1 hour ago
[-]
You are thinking too hard on this. This entire "benchmark" is a performative joke for attention that only works on HN.

> What will we have in five years? Maybe it will all have puttered out, and we will have moved to the next thing?

We will just have more of the same.

reply
Yiin
1 hour ago
[-]
You say it's performative joke, but it all depends what you're using model for. So far the rule has been quite straightforward, better models consistently renders pelican in higher quality, I've yet to see an exception. It is also a good enough (for me at least) test for "taste" the model has.
reply
j_maffe
42 minutes ago
[-]
> better models consistently renders pelican in higher quality The article literally avoid making this argument and gives counterexamples to this statement.
reply
ofjcihen
1 hour ago
[-]
I’m excited for this specific brand of survival horror.
reply
kherud
1 hour ago
[-]
Imagine what amazing SVG generators we could have if Simon had randomized the target image from the start (and companies wouldn't just overfit on pelicans).
reply
csomar
40 minutes ago
[-]
If anyone wants to try SVG generation from different models, I made this: https://codeinput.com/svg (here is an older generation: https://codeinput.com/s/5KEGl1e3rB3)

You still need an OpenRouter API Key and be careful this can burn quite a bit of money.

reply
brcmthrowaway
48 minutes ago
[-]
Imagine shilling some CLI tools no one uses in this post.
reply
dghlsakjg
36 minutes ago
[-]
Lighten up.

You’re reading a personal blog and complaining about an open source personal project he runs and distributes for free. He’s allowed to talk about his personal work on his personal blog. Especially considering the cli utility he talks about is directly related to the post.

Imagine complaining about someone generating valuable content for free and not packaging it to your personal tastes.

reply
mrcwinn
1 hour ago
[-]
K3 is as expensive as Sonnet, not great at writing English, is handing IP back to the Chinese, and once open source will be difficult to run at scale without the compute that OpenAI and Anthropic have largely grabbed.

Sorry, how again is this the end of the frontier labs?

reply
rootlocus
57 minutes ago
[-]
According to some benchmarks has the coding capability of Opus at the price of Sonnet, supposedly will be open weights and is not subject to random trade wars with allied states.

Competition is always good.

reply
olig15
54 minutes ago
[-]
You mean the scale that AWS provides with Bedrock?
reply
nickthegreek
14 minutes ago
[-]
Bedrock needs to actually update their chinese models to the newest versions for this to matter.
reply
BugsJustFindMe
1 hour ago
[-]
> This is expensive—the pelican cost 25 cents!

Engineers get unbelievably silly about evaluating costs of things.

"The tokens are so expensive!" Oh my sweet child, how much would even the least capable human effort cost? This is what the executives properly understand that the programmers don't.

reply
Yiin
1 hour ago
[-]
they're comparing to similar capability llm models, not humans. If one dishwasher does job at similar quality as another dishwasher, but using 30% more water and energy, you wouldn't compare to how much it costs human to do the same work, it would make no sense.
reply
BugsJustFindMe
1 hour ago
[-]
> they're comparing to similar capability llm models, not humans

25 cents is 10x the cost of 2.5 cents, but it's still extremely cheap for the product. It's very much the wrong comparison for a world where the primary competition is still humans who need to eat, and it treats percentage differences as more important than absolute differences when the opposite is true.

reply
jchw
1 hour ago
[-]
Well first of all, any non-trivial use of LLMs is going to be orders of magnitude more tokens than this, usually multiple millions at minimum. Benchmarks are just benchmarks after all.

Secondly, humans vs LLMs are apples vs oranges. It makes no more sense to compare human costs vs LLM costs as it would have to compare human costs vs calculator costs. LLMs are faster and cheaper but extremely different beasts with different limitations. Humans do not one-shot SVGs of pelicans riding bicycles, and they do not charge in tokens.

Comparing LLM cost efficiency is not something that should need to be defended. It's quite straightforward and reasonable...

reply
bakugo
1 hour ago
[-]
Would anyone pay a human to create an SVG of a pelican riding a bike?
reply
BugsJustFindMe
1 hour ago
[-]
In fact humans get paid to create SVGs of all kinds of things.
reply
codezero
49 minutes ago
[-]
Well, no, not now they won’t.
reply